Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAJ-EccOQxDjSgUL0AsCywoKDbOUNWDyxCKHQc+s6+ZemUh9Uzw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wg3kHxMP67XmQyCg7J+KfFgAsQqj1goUa3dKR-A812ZbA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-EccPLAD5TGg=KQ-m54ymrVdd++Dg7A_UR+v535iOVRsDe4w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-EccPLAD5TGg=KQ-m54ymrVdd++Dg7A_UR+v535iOVRsDe4w@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 23 Oct 2020 10:57:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wi_BD0OVHgj09kKgiuwyrth3ora_ZgLznW_q-+z-BR=3w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] SafeSetID changes for v5.10
To:     Micah Morton <mortonm@chromium.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 5:01 PM Micah Morton <mortonm@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> I just rebased to v5.9 to make sure the 1-line changes that touch
> kernel/capability.c, kernel/groups.c and kernel/sys.c still applied
> cleanly without conflicts. Should I have rebased onto one of the -rc's
> for v5.9 instead?

No. You shouldn't have rebased at all.

Making sure something applies cleanly is simply not a reason to rebase.

See

  Documentation/maintainer/rebasing-and-merging.rst

for some common rules.

             Linus